Power Basic Releases Version 10 of PB for Windows

[Marc van Cauwenberghe]

Me too

[Rolf Brandt]

Yep - I agree!

[Klaus Henn]

Me too

[Peter House]

Me 3

[Pete Totushek]

Count me in

[Michael Shillito]

Add me to the list

[Paul Squires]

At this rate, I should release a new FireFly every two weeks!!! I'd be rich!!!   ha ha ha ha 

Seriously, thanks guys. Your support for FireFly is amazing and I really appreciate it. We will have a PB10 compatible FireFly after I get my hands on the new compiler.

[José Roca]

Old code will compile with the new compiler using old headers. Maybe a couple of changes will be needed because a conflict with a new keyword or the use of DIM <variable name> (1:10) AS <variable type> because now you have to se 1 TO 10 instead of 1:10. But nothing of importance.

If you use the upcoming new include files, all the functions, methods and properties that need unicode string parameters or return unicode strings must be changed. No more use of UCODE$/ACODE$, as conversion is done automatically. Parameters that needed an unicode string, were declared AS DWORD, the variables were declared AS STRING and converted to unicode with UCODE$, and passed using STRPTR. Now, these parameters will be declared as WSTRING or WSTRINGZ, depending if the method wants an OLE string or a null-terminated unicode string (an ASCIIZ string with embeded nulls).

My new editor is unicode aware and, optionally, allows the use of unicode in comments and string literals (WYSIWYG). As the compiler only works with ansi files, unicode support in the editor is done using UTF-8 encoding.

[Paul Squires]

William Burns made the ultimate mistake on the PB forum - he expressed his opinion. Refer to http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=45796&page=3 and the subsequent posts by Zale inferring that William is purposely misleading customers.

Well, the fact is that our plan is to release information on our schedule. We won't engage in any arguments, and we sincerely hope that all of our friends here will simply review our information with care.

If you find it necessary to publish flawed assumptions about our products, it is indeed unfortunate. I hope you'll reconsider.

Best regards,

Bob Zale
PowerBASIC Inc.

Didn't seem to me that William was "arguing". It also appears that William is now not considered a "friend" and that William took it upon himself to "find it necessary to publish flawed assumptions".

Give me a break.

$20 bet that Zale also sent William a private message looking for a groveling apology.

Zale should stick to writing compilers and leave public relations to someone with more experience, tact, and genuine concern for his "friends".

[Bob Houle]

Geez Paul... Did the Bruins lose last night? 

You're right of course... I didn't think anything William said was out of place, he was only stating that:
"Given the published information... he wouldn't pre-order".
His current procedures were working, so why hurry to change.

[Gary Stout]

Zale should stick to writing compilers and leave public relations to someone with more experience, tact, and genuine concern for his "friends".

I certainly agree with this, Paul He tends to want to debate anyone that speaks their opinion

Gary

[Marc van Breemen]

$20 bet that Zale also sent William a private message looking for a groveling apology.

Sounds like you speak out of experience ... 

[Douglas McDonald]

I don't know enough, not even close but I hope that in some degree PB 10 will allow FF3 (Paul) to come up with some real debugging.

It's wishful thinking since I think it really has nothing to do with Pb's compiler but more to do with PB not opening up their debugger. I'm very surprised that some very good PB programmer hasn't come up with a good debugger.

I see the lack of good debugging outside (even inside) Pb to be its weakest point.

Doug

[Michael Stefanik]

Did anyone notice, they now have "STATIC LIB SUPPORT"?!?

I thought this was a "no no"... listening to everyone say "we can't have static libs; whose lib format would we use"?

So, now they have it; I wonder which format they used?

Their own format, as expected. The issue was never that there couldn't be static libraries per se; the issue was with those people who were asking for the ability to link to Microsoft's object files and libraries and I posted a few messages on the PB forums explaining in some detail why that simply wasn't realistic.

So you'll have static link libraries, but they'll only be useable by and for PowerBasic. If you want any kind of language interoperability, you're still looking at using DLLs.

[Roger Garstang]

Man, I'm away for a while and miss another fun thread.  I did notice the BZ rant over in the PB forums, but don't post much there anymore.  The new version does look interesting.  I must have ticked Bob off last Beta when they screwed up the File Open Dialog stuff by not including the fix from 8 years ago in the inc files until the very end...the new PB internal was later fixed when it failed since they again forgot how the inc file needed fixed.  He removed all my comments on it then and I didn't get invited to the Beta party this time around.  Sounds like Jose is still in though.  I'm more curious about the resource compiler stuff than the things they finally added.  I'm wondering if they finally included the ability for the new resources that fail in the old one needing me to use my VS RC and if they support all types.  I often use ANI Icons which I bug Paul with all the time too and are often forgotten.  Along with supporting raw data and the XP/Vista manifests, etc.  With support for strings like they have now, being able to have easy string tables to support different languages integrated right in and easy to use would be nice too.  Built in commands for resource handling would be a plus too since they are part of the code now being able to read/write would fit right in.